The International Evidence on Income Distribution in Modern Economies: Where Do We Stand?

  • Timothy M. Smeeding
  • Peter Gottschalk
Part of the International Economic Association Series book series (IEA)

Abstract

Interest in cross-national comparison of personal income distributions, low relative incomes, and income inequality in general has grown dramatically during the past five years. Interest in cross-national distribution research did not come about by accident; several factors helped propel this line of research in the 1980s and 1990s. First of all, income distributions in the United States, the United Kingdom, and in several other nations began to trend toward greater inequality in a systematic and secular pattern, and the inequality-generating pressures of a rapidly internationalizing highly technical economy were felt in several modern nations. Second, the former state socialist nations of Central and Eastern Europe (CEE) began a still continuing process of economic and social adjustment and transition to a new socioeconomic order. While this transition is still underway, CEE nations have experienced large changes in both real income levels and in income distribution. Third, along with the rise in inequality, a growing interest in the question of ‘fairness’ vis-à-vis ‘budget pressures’ was present in the national political debates of the late 1980s and early 1990s, thus making ‘income distribution’ a legitimate realm of political inquiry.

Keywords

Europe Transportation Income Plague Timothy 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Atkinson, A. B. (1994) ‘Explaining the Distribution of Income’, mimeo prepared for the J. Rowntree Inquiry into Income and Wealth (Cambridge: University of Cambridge).Google Scholar
  2. Atkinson, A. B. (1995) ‘Income Distribution in Europe and the United States’, LIS Working Paper, 133 (October).Google Scholar
  3. Atkinson, A. B., L. Rainwater and T. Smeeding (1995) Income Distribution in OECD Countries: Evidence from the Luxembourg Income Study (LIS) (Paris: OECD).Google Scholar
  4. Buhmann, B., L. Rainwater, G. Schmaus and T. Smeeding (1988) ‘Equivalence Scales, Weil-Being, Inequality and Poverty: Sensitivity Estimates Across Ten Countries Using the Luxembourg Income Study (LIS) Data Base’, Review of Income and Wealthy vol. 34, pp. 115–142.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Commission of the European Communities (1993a) Social Protection in Europe, 1993 (Brussels: Directorate General for Employment, Industrial Relations and Social Affairs).Google Scholar
  6. Commission of the European Communities (1993b) ‘Recent Reforms in Social Protection Systems in the Community’, in Social Protection in Europe, Chapter 2 (Brussels: Directorate General for Employment, Industrial Relations and Social Affairs), pp. 31–40.Google Scholar
  7. Gardiner, K. (1993) ‘A Survey of Income Inequality Over the Last Twenty Years — How Does the United Kingdom Compare?’, Welfare State Programme Discussion Paper, WSP/100 (London: London School of Economics).Google Scholar
  8. Gottschalk, P. and T. Smeeding (1997) ‘Cross-National Comparisons of Earnings and Income Inequality’, Journal of Economic Literature, vol. 35, pp. 633–86.Google Scholar
  9. Gottschalk, P., B. Gustafsson and E. Palmer (eds) (1997) The Distribution of Economic Welfare in the 1980s (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press).Google Scholar
  10. Hagenaars, A., K. de Vos and A. Zaidi (1994) ‘Patterns of Poverty in Europe’ mimeo (Netherlands: University of Leiden), mimeo.Google Scholar
  11. Hanratty, M. and R. Blank (1993) ‘Down and Out in North America: Recent Trends in Poverty Rates in the US and Canada’, Quarterly Journal of Economics, vol. 10, pp. 233–57.Google Scholar
  12. Messere, K. C. (1994) Tax Policy in OECD Countries: Choices and Conflicts (Amsterdam Publications BV).Google Scholar
  13. Milanovic, B. (1995) ‘Determinants of Cross-Country Income Inequality: An Augmented Kuznets’ Hypothesis’, in Income Distribution During the Transition, Research Project Paper, vol. 5 (Washington, DC: World Bank).Google Scholar
  14. Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) (1994) ‘New Orientations for Social Policy,’ Social Policy Studies No. 12 (Paris: OECD).Google Scholar
  15. Ploug, N. and J. Kvist (eds) (1994) Recent Trends in Cash Benefits in Europe (Copenhagen: Danish National Institute of Social Research).Google Scholar
  16. Rainwater, L. and T. Smeeding (1995) ‘Doing Poorly: The Real Income of American Children in a Comparative Perspective’, Luxembourg Income Study Working Paper, 127, Center for Policy Research, The Maxwell School, Syracuse University.Google Scholar
  17. Saunders, P. (1994) ‘Rising on the Tasman Tide: Income Inequality in Australia and New Zealand in the 1980s’, SPRC Discussion Papers, vol. 49, University of New South Wales.Google Scholar
  18. Smeeding, T., P. Saunders, J. Coder, S. Jenkins, J. Fritzell, A. Hagenaars, R. Hauser and M. Wolfson (1993) ‘Poverty, Inequality and Family Living Standard Impacts across Seven Nations: The Effect of Noncash Subsidies’, Review of Income and Wealth, vol. 39, no. 3, pp. 229–56.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Smeeding, T., L. Rainwater and D. Torrey (1993) ‘Going to Extremes: The US Elderly in an International Context’, Luxembourg Income Study Working Paper, 89, Center for Policy Research, The Maxwell School, Syracuse University.Google Scholar
  20. Summers, R. and A. Heston (1991) ‘The Penn World Table (Mark 5): An Expanded Set of International Comparisons, 1950–1988’, Quarterly Journal of Economics (May), pp. 327–68.Google Scholar
  21. Torrey, B., T. Smeeding and D. Bailey (1997) ‘Rowing between Scylla and Charybdis? Income Transitions in Central European Households’, forthcoming in an untitled National Academy of Sciences book on economic transformation of households and health.Google Scholar
  22. World Bank (1995) The World Bank Atlas 1995 (Washington, DC: World Bank).CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© International Economic Association 1998

Authors and Affiliations

  • Timothy M. Smeeding
    • 1
  • Peter Gottschalk
    • 2
  1. 1.Syracuse UniversityUSA
  2. 2.Boston CollegeUSA

Personalised recommendations